Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />October 9, 2019 <br />Page 2 <br />Mr. Everson questioned if the buffer is recommended or required. Staff recommends <br />a buffer, but it is not required. It is recommended that the buffer decision be recorded <br />against the property. <br />Mr. Ruhland asked for confirmation that the buffer minimum is 10 feet. Ms. Larsen <br />restated a 20 foot average for the buffer. <br />Mr. Ruhland questioned if there is a wetland setback requirement if there is a deck. <br />Ms. Larsen stated that a deck could be built up to the 10 foot drainage and utility <br />easement around the wetland. <br />Mr. Ruhland questioned previous variances similar to this case. This is the first shore <br />land variance under 20,000 square feet that current staff has seen. This is a unique <br />situation and recognized when considering extending sanitary sewer and water to the <br />area. The greater benefit is getting sewer and water utilities extended and getting rid <br />of onsite septic systems in the neighborhood. <br />Mr. Ruhland inquired about the floodplain and fill area that will raise the house. Staff <br />explained that the house will be raised 5 feet from the wetland area. <br />Ms. Hankee stated that the submittal to FEMA does not accommodate a deck or <br />accessory structure. The FEMA process will have to be re -done and include this to be <br />approved. <br />Mr. Stimpson asked if conversations with the DNR included the wetland buffer <br />consideration. Ms. Larsen stated the DNR's recommendation was based off criteria <br />that should be met and that there is an existing viable lot with nothing stating that it <br />has to be subdivided. <br />Mr. Stimpson suggested a percentage of the water front be used instead of a specific <br />number for the shore line access area. <br />Ms. Peacock questioned the average size of the other lots that could be subdivided. <br />Ms. Larsen stated that some are in the 40,000 square foot range. Submittals will be <br />taken on a lot by lot basis. Ms. Hankee discussed the other lot's status. <br />Mr. Laden questioned why the property is not planned to subdivide into two small <br />lots rather than one conforming lot and one smaller non -conforming lot. Staff <br />considered this; a smaller lot would be more of a deviation and impacts to the lake <br />would not be greatly different. <br />Mr. Laden questioned if the houses are required to hook up with the utility <br />improvements. Ms. Larsen stated that all the property owners along West Shadow can <br />hook up when they are ready. A platting process itself requires utility hook up. <br />Mr. Laden questioned if neighbors are notified by mail for the variance. Ms. Larsen <br />stated that a notice was sent regarding the preliminary plat and variance. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />